On the optimal model configuration for aerodynamic modeling of open cargo railway train

This study is concerned with the optimal model configuration for aerodynamic modeling of long open cargo railway trains. Frontal air drag of several train configurations was studied using numerical modeling and physical i.e. wind tunnel testing of 1:40 scale railcar models in a range of cross-wind angles. In a long train, the locomotive and the last railcar influence the aerodynamic characteristics of the first three and the last three railcars only. Aerodynamic performance of all other railcars in the long train is similar and can be represented by two inner-train railcars only. A model train configuration combining the shortest computation time with the lowest experimental error was determined from numerical modeling and this was then used for wind tunnel testing. It has been shown that, for long open cargo railway trains the model consisting of six railcars with two streamlined bodies is the optimal configuration, with both the numerical modeling and wind tunnel testing results in good agreement.

[1]  V. Gregory Weirs,et al.  Adaptive Mesh Refinement - Theory and Applications , 2008 .

[2]  Shaohong Cheng,et al.  The effects of freestream turbulence on the drag coefficient of a sphere , 2009 .

[3]  P B Joshi.  AERODYNAMIC FORCES ON FREIGHT TRAINS VOLUME II--FULL-SCALE AERODYNAMIC VALIDATION TESTS OF TRAILER-ON-A-FLAT CAR (SERIES II) , 1978 .

[4]  Kevin R. Cooper,et al.  An investigation of Reynolds number effects on the steady and unsteady aerodynamic forces on a 1 : 10 scale bridge deck section model , 2001 .

[5]  Christopher Baker,et al.  Wind tunnel tests to obtain train aerodynamic drag coefficients: Reynolds number and ground simulation effects , 1991 .

[6]  Christopher Baker,et al.  The flow around high speed trains , 2010 .

[7]  Spencer C. Sorenson,et al.  Driving Resistance from Railroad Trains , 2005 .

[8]  Tatsuo Maeda,et al.  WIND TUNNEL TESTS TO REDUCE AERODYNAMIC DRAG OF TRAINS BY SMOOTHING THE UNDER-FLOOR CONSTRUCTION , 2001 .

[9]  Li Xuanyou.  An Investigation of Error Sources in Computational Fluid Dynamics Modelling of a Co-current Spray Dryer , 2004 .

[10]  Brett L. Jones,et al.  Experimental Investigation into the Aerodynamic Ground Effect of a Tailless Chevron-Shaped UCAV , 2012 .

[11]  Christopher J. Roy,et al.  Aerodynamic Design of Heavy Vehicles Reporting Period January 15, 2004 through April 15, 2004 , 2004 .

[12]  Christopher J. Roy,et al.  DOE's Effort to Reduce Truck Aerodynamic Drag Through Joint Experiments and Computations , 2005 .

[13]  Piotr Lukaszewicz,et al.  Running resistance - results and analysis of full-scale tests with passenger and freight trains in Sweden , 2007 .

[14]  Prakash B Joshi.  AERODYNAMIC FORCES ON FREIGHT TRAINS.. , 1978 .

[15]  Christopher Baker,et al.  A study of the slipstreams of high-speed passenger trains and freight trains , 2008 .

[16]  R. P. Hoxey,et al.  Observations of Reynolds number sensitivity in the separated flow region on a bluff body , 1998 .

[17]  Kevin R. Cooper,et al.  Bluff-body aerodynamics as applied to vehicles , 1993 .

[18]  R. Hoxey,et al.  Bluff bodies in deep turbulent boundary layers: Reynolds-number issues , 2007, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[19]  A G Hammitt.  AERODYNAMIC FORCES ON FREIGHT TRAINS-VOLUME IV WIND TUNNEL TESTS OF FREIGHT CARS AND NEW TRAILER AND CONTAINER CAR DESIGNS , 1979 .

[20]  Gl Larose,et al.  On the Reynolds number sensitivity of the aerodynamics of bluff bodies with sharp edges , 2006 .

[21]  S. S. Desai.  Relative roles of computational fluid dynamics and wind tunnel testing in the development of aircraft , 2003 .

[22]  V. Gregory Weirs,et al.  Adaptive mesh refinement theory and applications : proceedings of the Chicago Workshop on Adaptive Mesh Refinement Methods, Sept. 3-5, 2003 , 2005 .

[23]  Andrew Quinn,et al.  The slipstream and wake of a high-speed train , 2001 .